Asian and Pacific countries have made
remarkable progress in reducing poverty;
however, roughly one quarter of Asian and
Pacific people still live in poverty.
More than half the population in Asia and the
Pacific was living in poverty in 1990 (poverty
defined as those living on less than PPP$1.25,
constant 2005 prices, per day). By 2008, the
incidence of poverty had fallen by more than half,
leaving less than one quarter of the regional
population in poverty. In absolute terms, the
numbers of the poverty-stricken in Asia and the
Pacific declined from about 1.6 billion in 1990
to 0.9 billion in 2008, while the total population
grew by approximately 0.8 billion people. Faster
reduction in the incidence of poverty in the
region has brought Asia and the Pacific to the
world average rate of 23% in 2008. Although,
this is a reduction in the incidence of poverty, in
2008, the number of people living in poverty in
the region was 945 million.
Based on recent data for specific subregions, the
incidence of poverty is highest in South and
South-West Asia (at 36%), followed by South-
East Asia (21%), East and North-East Asia
(13%), and North and Central Asia (8.2%).
Although the rate of poverty fell in all subregions
from 1990 onward, East and North-East Asia
and South and South-West Asia recorded the
relative fastest reductions.
The world’s two most populous countries, China
and India, are in Asia. Both countries have been
able to reduce poverty over last few decades, with
China doing so much more rapidly. In 2005, the
percentage of people living in poverty in India
was more than double that in China. Sustained
high economic growth in India in recent years is
expected to bring down poverty levels, which in
turn will further improve the outlook of the
Asia-Pacific region as a whole in reducing poverty.
Note that poverty data based on the PPP$1.25
is not available for many years and many countries. For the calculation of aggregates
missing values are imputed for some countries
using the methods described in the Yearbook
Annex on statistical methods. Additionally, note
that the availability of poverty data is extremely
limited across the Pacific subregion.
Figure I.43 – Population living in poverty
(2005 PPP$1.25 a day), Asia and the Pacific,
earliest and latest

The incidence of poverty is below 5% in a
number of developing countries, including
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Malaysia, Mongolia, the Russian Federation,
Thailand and Turkey. Many countries in the
region have lower poverty rates in recent years in
comparison with rates of the early 1990s; declines
have been pronounced in Cambodia, China,
Turkmenistan and Viet Nam.
Burden of poverty on women
Poverty impacts women and men differently and a number of factors, such as biased macroeconomic and institutional
structures, discriminatory laws and customs, and societal attitudes make it more likely that women will fall into
and remain in poverty than men. Women are particularly vulnerable to exploitation, discrimination and violence,
thereby exacerbating their experiences of hardship in many different areas of their lives and presenting them with
multiple obstacles to escaping poverty. Poverty denies women opportunities and the ability to live healthy, long,
productive lives; to participate in decision making; to enjoy basic rights and freedoms such as access to clean drinking
water and sanitation; or even to receive adequate respect and dignity in societies, given their usually lower status
than men. |
Measuring national poverty
Many countries have their own poverty
thresholds or lines. Estimates based on a national
poverty line are not comparable across countries.
While such national estimates could reflect the
degree of change in poverty over time, definitions
of poverty lines and methodologies might also
change within a country, thus skewing the
long-term perspective on poverty change.
In terms of national poverty, China was able to
reduce poverty from 6.0% in 1996 to 2.8% in
2004. In India the poverty level declined from
36% in 1994 to 29% in 2000. Bangladesh and
Nepal also saw significant decreases in the
incidence of poverty. In South-East Asia,
Indonesia was severely hit by the 1997 financial
crisis, but still managed to reduce poverty
between 1996 and 2004 (from 18% to 17%).
Viet Nam achieved major success in reducing its
poverty level from 37% in 1998 to 29% in 2002.
Poverty surged in most countries of North and
Central Asia early in the 1990s, as their
economies began the transition from centrally
planned to market systems. Nevertheless, all
countries with available data were subsequently
able to succeed in reducing poverty. For example,
in Kazakhstan, the poverty rate fell from 35% in
1996 to 15% in 2002. Poverty gap
The poverty gap ratio is a key indicator that
measures how far the extreme poor fall below the
poverty line and reflects both depth and
incidence of poverty. In most Asian countries the
poverty gap appears to have narrowed during the last decade and a half. The highest poverty gap
ratios exist in the low income countries,
confirming that pockets of extreme poverty are
concentrated among the poorest and most
vulnerable countries. Among countries that have
data, the ratio is highest in Nepal, at 20%. In
North and Central Asia, ratios are generally very
low except in Uzbekistan, where it was 15% in
2003. No country in the Pacific has recent data
for the poverty gap ratio.
Figure I.44 – Gini index, Asia and the Pacific,
earliest and latest

Measuring income inequality
The incidence and depth of poverty have been
declining fairly consistently. The trend is less
clear, however, for income inequality. One means
of assessing income equality is by considering the
proportion of national production consumed by
the poorest quintile of the population. The
poorest quintile of the population receive a small
share in a number of middle- and high-income
countries, such as Singapore (5.0%), Turkey
(5.4%), Thailand (6.1%), the Islamic Republic
of Iran (6.4%), and Malaysia (6.4%). Those in
the poorest quintile do relatively better in India
(8.1%), Pakistan (9.1%) and Bangladesh (9.4%).
Similar results come from application of the Gini
index, an aggregate measure of inequality that
takes into account the complete distribution of
income. Inequality in Bhutan, Cambodia, China,
Georgia, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Philippines,
the Russian Federation, Singapore, Sri Lanka,
Turkey, Turkmenistan and Thailand is highest
according to the latest available data, with all the
countries listed having a Gini index above 40.
No clear regional trend emerges for inequality.
Since the early 1990s, inequality seems to have
increased in some countries, such as Bangladesh,
Cambodia, Nepal and Sri Lanka; while it has
decreased in others, such as Indonesia, Islamic
Republic of Iran, Malaysia and Thailand.
Rural and urban differences
Country-level aggregate poverty data yield a general picture of the poverty that exists in a specific country. However,
the various parts of a country might exhibit diverse patterns of income poverty that reflect different economic
conditions. For example, differences in poverty levels between rural and urban may exist. Greater poverty in rural
areas is a dominant phenomenon for two reasons: (a) the greater proportion of the population in Asia and the
Pacific lives in rural areas; and (b) the incidence of poverty tends to be higher in rural than in urban areas.
For example, consider the rural and urban poverty ratios of the three most populous countries in the region – China,
India and Indonesia. Urban poverty has been virtually eliminated in China. Poverty levels in the rural areas of India
and Indonesia are much higher than in urban areas. Poverty has been reduced faster in urban areas in all three of
these countries.
Proportion of the rural and urban population below the poverty line of PPP$1.25 per day*
| Country and year data collected |
Population below poeverty line |
Rural proportion of total population |
Rural |
Urban |
| China |
1990 |
74.1 |
23.4 |
72.6 |
| |
2005 |
26.1 |
1.7 |
59.6 |
| India |
1994 |
52.5 |
40.8 |
74.5 |
| |
2005 |
43.8 |
36.2 |
71.3 |
| Indonesia |
1990 |
57.1 |
47.8 |
69.4 |
| |
2005 |
24.0 |
18.7 |
51.9 |
| * World Bank, Povcal Net. Available here: http://go.worldbank.org/WE8P1I8250 |
In addition to rural and urban differences, remote areas and regions can lag behind the mainstream within countries,
particularly large ones. In Thailand, for example, the north-eastern region shows the highest incidence of poverty,
followed by the northern, southern and central regions, whereas the Bangkok metropolis has the lowest incidence
of poverty, according to the National Economic and Social Development Board in its 2009 report on the Thai
performance in meeting Millennium Development Goals.1 |
|